When the RCMP investigates the powerful

With the investigation leading to charges of fraud and breach of trust against retired senator Mac Harb and suspended senator Patrick Brazeau, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police have signalled their commitment to keep rooting out potential criminality in all levels of government. For the RCMP and for us citizens, this had better go well.

With the investigation leading to charges of fraud and breach of trust against retired senator Mac Harb and suspended senator Patrick Brazeau, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police have signalled their commitment to keep rooting out potential criminality in all levels of government.

For the RCMP and for us citizens, this had better go well.

Unfortunately, because of the government’s refusal to give the Mounties the tools that so many have said they need to get the job done, these investigations may slip into the gorges of petty politics, personal reprisal and conspiracy that have tripped them up in the past. But in watching what unfolds closely, we may still have a chance to get it right.

The RCMP’s problems have played out in a series of high-profile scandals over the last 15 years: allegations of improper pension management and subsequent leadership coverup; misleading parliamentary committees on sensitive intelligence files, again matched with apparent efforts to cover up; allegations of browbeating from the top contributing to a culture of bullying that sets the stage for harassment. The list goes on.

David Brown, the former chair of the Ontario Securities Commission who was tasked in 2007 with righting the Mounties’ ship, was clear on what had to happen: the RCMP needed an independent civilian board of management that would work in partnership with Mountie brass to rationalize the organization and, critically, insulate it from any undue political interference. In the years following the Brown report, RCMP leadership — including then Commissioner Bill Elliott — extolled the virtues of this approach.

It never happened: public service insiders say Elliott didn’t sell it; Elliot says factions within the RCMP were not with him; and it seems the Conservative government did not want to hear about Mountie independence.

Without such a board, the RCMP has pressed forward to improve itself under Bob Paulson. There are promising signals, such as improvements to internal discipline processes and relationships with municipal and provincial governments. Now, standing up to their federal masters is a bold and treacherous move that could make or break the Mounties’ efforts to re-win the public trust that a decade of scandal has shaken.

We have been down this road before — and the Mounties seem to have got it wrong. In December 2005, the RCMP took the unusual step of naming suspects — including the Liberal finance minister, Ralph Goodale — as part of an ongoing securities investigation (that had not produced charges) in the middle of an election campaign. Curiously, it was the commissioner at the time, Giuliano Zaccardelli, who insisted on including Goodale’s (since cleared) name in the press release. As a result, any good intentions the RCMP may have had were lost in a vapour of theories that brass had sought to sway the election against the Liberals.

It is clear how a board of management would help the RCMP avoid these gorges. First, a board would develop and enforce clear protocols on when and under what circumstances to name powerful politicians and corporate leaders implicated in criminal investigations. Second, that board would insulate Mountie brass from any petty reprisal on the part of the powerful: RCMP leadership would be free to act in the public interest without consideration of the relative strength or weakness of a political or corporate insider suspected of abusing the public trust.

Admittedly, such a board would cost money: it would have to be resourced with sufficient legal expertise to take on the powerful. Nevertheless, the dividends would be there not only for the Mounties in terms of enhanced public image, but also for ordinary Canadians whose lives are dependent on quality government services and a level and fair open market.

Criminal misbehaviour at the top of the political and corporate pyramid undermines market performance. It sends the powerful signal to citizens, consumers, investors and taxpayers that they are not getting true value for their money or time investment. In this situation, we rationally sit on our resources — or, even worse, we pull them out: Who wants to pay taxes or invest in crooked economies?

In this space, economy and society fall apart. Adam Smith, the father of modern capitalism, understood this well when he said that setting the conditions for healthy markets is the primary responsibility of government. Smith would have appreciated turning the police loose not only on the petty criminals who upset small apple carts, but on the political and corporate marauders that abuse their elite status to undermine the whole marketplace.

Equipping the RCMP with the governance framework it needs to enhance political and market integrity would be a significant return to the historic mission of the police to serve the public interest by keeping those who do the most structural damage in check.

Michael Kempa is an associate professor of criminology at the University of Ottawa. Twitter.com/MichaelAKempa

This Week's Flyers

Comments

We encourage all readers to share their views on our articles and blog posts. We are committed to maintaining a lively but civil forum for discussion, so we ask you to avoid personal attacks, and please keep your comments relevant and respectful. If you encounter a comment that is abusive, click the "X" in the upper right corner of the comment box to report spam or abuse. We are using Facebook commenting. Visit our FAQ page for more information.